See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Trackbacks

1. The Saloon dot net
2. The Snooper Report

Trackback URL

Comments

1. #822655
   On October 13th, 2009 at 12:57 pm, John424 said:

   Wait…you think that getting more subscribers is going to cause Fox News to LOWER their price point?

   That’s not what I’m saying. I’m referring to the service provider’s ability to charge for advertising on that particular station.

   I speak of the service provider, not the programming provider.

2. #822662
   On October 13th, 2009 at 1:01 pm, John424 said:

   So, by your theory, there are cable or satellite providers in the US that offer FNC but do not offer CNN?

   You cannot be serious.

   But it could be taken seriously that there are providers that offer CNN but not FNC?

   I think that in this day and age, both situations could exist.

   FNC is NOT a johnny-come-lately. They have been around for 13 – 14 years now. I don’t think it’s impossible at all for this situation to exist.

3. #822664
   On October 13th, 2009 at 1:01 pm, rambler said:

   It was fine for Bush to be on the receiving end of all sorts of smears and critical comments. BHO can’t seem to take any negative comments even when true. He doesn’t have the backbone to be POTUS. He already blamed FOX for his win not being a higher percent of the votes and probably thinks that FOX will prevent he from getting a 2nd term. After all, he’s just soooooo charming that his falling poll numbers can’t be due to his faulty policies. Maybe he should have taken a leadership class instead of all those organizing classes. American follow leaders; freeloaders follow organizers hoping to get crumbs.

4. #822672
   On October 13th, 2009 at 1:08 pm, right_on said:

   The Obama Administration disagrees with the opinions of the commentators at Fox News, therefore, using the left’s criteria for condemnation…

   Obama and his administration of liberal and progressive statists are RACIST!

5. #822675
   On October 13th, 2009 at 1:12 pm, chapoutier said:

   But it could be taken seriously that there are providers that offer CNN but not FNC?

   No. I do not find it credible that there are any cable or satellite providers that do not offer either one of them at all.

   They are two of the most popular and ubiquitous cable stations out there. It would be like a sneaker store not selling Nikes and Reeboks.

   Which is why I find your definition of “available” not credible.

6. #822682
   On October 13th, 2009 at 1:18 pm, John424 said:

   It would be like a sneaker store not selling Nikes and Reeboks.

   There’s plenty of stores out there that do just that.

   Which is why I find your definition of “available” not credible.

   YOU may not find it credible, but that’s how the industry does it.

   But then again, I’m arguing with someone who cites Wikipedia as a valid source for information.

   Good night Gracie.

7. #822695
   On October 13th, 2009 at 1:34 pm, chapoutier said:

   There’s plenty of stores out there that do just that.

   Not any that stay in business. If you can find one single cable company out there that does not offer CNN at some level, I will admit I am wrong.

   YOU may not find it credible, but that’s how the industry does it.

   Show me where you get that.

   But then again, I’m arguing with someone who cites Wikipedia as a valid source for information.

   A better source than what you have cited, which is…none.

8. #822697
   On October 13th, 2009 at 1:34 pm, b-cat said:

   Democrats complaining about Fox News is worse than silly. It shows them to be a bunch of whiny crybabies. Waaaaah! I’m a Democrat and above criticism! Fox News is baaaad! Waaaaaah!

   What a bunch of sissies.

9. #822706
   On October 13th, 2009 at 1:42 pm, AlohaGuy said:

   Or maybe this is better. If 40% of the town buys chicken and 20% buy steak, 15% buy hamburger, 18% buy brisket, and 7% buy sirloin tips, should we conclude that chicken is more popular than beef?

   If 40% of the people live in a part of town that only sells beef you would have to exclude them from the analysis. (A quick Google shows that something like 40% of Americans don’t have cable.)

10. #822708
    On October 13th, 2009 at 1:45 pm, AlohaGuy said:

    BTW, every time I channel surf past CNN, someone named Erica is on the floor licking Anderson Cooper’s shoes. What’s with that?

11. #822715
    On October 13th, 2009 at 1:48 pm, chapoutier said:

    If 40% of the people live in a part of town that only sells beef you would have to exclude them from the analysis. (A quick Google shows that something like 40% of Americans don’t have cable.)

    At most 15%, Aloha, don’t have cable or satellite. I have heard more recently about 10% due to the switch to digital.

12. #822723
    On October 13th, 2009 at 1:59 pm, yohannbiimu said:

    Just as with everything else that the loopy left says regarding their opponents, it’s total projection. If you report the truth when it isn’t good news for Obama’s political party, and THAT makes others to conclude that it’s because they are an arm of another party, it is only because everyone else is in the tank for Obama.

    The sorts of things that are happening out in the open (such as Obama accepting the Nobel Peace Prize) should make people pause and at least wonder about this bumbling nit-wit who resides in the White House. It didn’t take much to get pundits to do more than that with ‘Dubya, and rightfully so; however, there is NO scrutiny whatsoever with the same folks who justified the calls that he be impeached or even assassinated.

    I wonder at what point that these people totally lose every particle of integrity that they ever had as they continue to prostrate themselves to B.O.

13. #822728
    On October 13th, 2009 at 2:02 pm, yohannbiimu said:

    …however, there is NO scrutiny whatsoever for Obama with the same folks who justified the calls that he be impeached or even assassinated.

    –Needed to fix that…

14. #822730
    On October 13th, 2009 at 2:03 pm, yohannbiimu said:

    …however, there is NO scrutiny whatsoever for Obama with the same folks who justified the calls that Bush be impeached or even assassinated.

    Crud! I needed to fix it again…

15. #822748
    On October 13th, 2009 at 2:16 pm, huggybear said:

    A little perspective:

    Fox News averaged 2.25 million total viewers in prime time for the third quarter, up 2% over the previous year. That’s more than CNN (946,000, down 30%) and MSNBC (788,000, down 10%) combined

    2.25mil + 788K + 946K = 3.98mil

    3.98mil / 304mil = 1.3%

    You are arguing over the television viewing habits of 1.3% of the United States population.

    Democrats complaining about Fox News is worse than silly. It shows them to be a bunch of whiny crybabies. Waaaaah! I’m a Democrat and above criticism! Fox News is baaaad! Waaaaaah!

    What a bunch of sissies.

    And this is different than conservatives whining about the mainstream media how, exactly?

16. #822762
    On October 13th, 2009 at 2:27 pm, AlohaGuy said:

    What a bunch of sissies.
    …
    And this is different than conservatives whining about the mainstream media how, exactly?

    They’re sissies.

17. #822763
    On October 13th, 2009 at 2:27 pm, chapoutier said:

    You are arguing over the television viewing habits of 1.3% of the United States population.

    Hah. Good point.

18. #822764
    On October 13th, 2009 at 2:27 pm, Major O said:

    On October 13th, 2009 at 12:21 pm, Flyoverman said:
    What is significant is that the only media outlet the White House feels it has to concern itself with is Fox News. What their actions imply is all of the other media outlets of significance are considered “friendly.”

    Good journalists are supposed to be by nature skeptical. The lack of skepticism from the rest of the media over all things Obama is the real story here.

    Chap and company can debate how many devils can dance on the head of a journalist’s pen, but the bottom line is jouurnalism as a profession is DEAD. What remains for the most part are politicized cheerleaders.

    These are the conditins which spawn the tyrants. I am not saying Obama is …..yet, but the conditions are ripe for someone, if not today, then soon.

    (emph mine)

    Spot on.
    I suppose the comeback would be that the Obama admin considers that the other networks do an “acceptable” amount of criticism or that their criticism is “fact-based” as opposed to the “propaganda” from Fox.

    The complaints about Fox are even further fueled by the need for some Liberals to have a media outlet they can complain about as biased, IMO.

19. #822776
    On October 13th, 2009 at 2:38 pm, John424 said:

    Not any that stay in business.

    Umm. Yes there are. I can name several that sell ONLY Nike, or Reebok, or Adidas that have been in business for decades now. Quite successful. I can take you to one business just in my hometown that offers nothing but Nikes when it comes to athletic shoes, and they have been in business for over 50 years now. (No need to tell me that Nikes have only been around for the last 40 years or so, I know that. I’m talking about their stocking habits of the last 25 – 30 years only.)

    Show me where you get that.

    Personal knowledge Chap. You rely on it all the time in your arguments.

    A better source than what you have cited

    Guess that depends on whether or not a person’s own experiences and knowledge trump a web site that can be edited by anyone with an agenda without any editorial oversight.

    Me? My only agenda is to make you think and perhaps realize that maybe, just maybe, you don’t know everything in the world. A law degree is a wonderful thing, but it didn’t confer on you the title “All Knowing Master of Time, Space and Dimension.” And no, I don’t pretend to hold that title either – but I do know that there are some things I DO know that you DO NOT.

    Bye. I’m out of here.

20. #822780
    On October 13th, 2009 at 2:41 pm, huggybear said:

    They’re sissies.

    Ah, clever! But now I’m invoking the rubber/glue defense. So there.

21. #822784
    On October 13th, 2009 at 2:44 pm, chapoutier said:

    I can name several that sell ONLY Nike, or Reebok, or Adidas that have been in business for decades now.

    And how is that an appropriate analogy to a cable provider that, by definition, provides a bunch of stations?

    Personal knowledge Chap. You rely on it all the time in your arguments.

    Maybe your personal knowledge can extend to showing me a single cable provider that does not offer CNN at some level. Please. Just one. Because your entire argument rests on the assumption that there are at least several that do not.

    Anyone? Please help the man out. I know that we have folks from all corners of the country. Let me know if your cable provider does not offer CNN.

22. #822853
    On October 13th, 2009 at 3:38 pm, John424 said:

    And how is that an appropriate analogy to a cable provider that, by definition, provides a bunch of stations?

    I never said it was. You’re the one who brought the ridiculous analogy into this discussion to begin with.

    Because your entire argument rests on the assumption that there are at least several that do not.

    Actually, if you read my posts, it does not. You are free to make the assumption – don’t try to pin it on me as you tried to pin the ridiculous athletic shoe = cable/satellite analogy on me.

    Chappy, have you never heard of such things as contracts and contract disputes? I can name more than one station that is carried by one service provider and not another simply because that station demanded a rate increase for their programming and the service provider refused to pay the newer rate. Why would it be impossible for either CNN or Fox News to be the station in question in that circumstance . . . after all, Huggybear pointed out that we are talking about a measley 1.3% here.

    This time I mean it. I’m done with this. You trying to pin that absurd athletic shoe = cable/satellite provider analogy is enough to convince me you are simply arguing for the sake of argument.

    “That’s not an argument!”
    “Yes it is!”
    “No it isn’t!”
    “Yes it is!”

23. #822856
    On October 13th, 2009 at 3:40 pm, John424 said:

    btw Chap, thanks for finally acknowledging my original point here:

    that does not offer CNN at some level

24. #822877
    On October 13th, 2009 at 4:01 pm, chapoutier said:

    Actually, if you read my posts, it does not.

    Yes, it does. Shame you can’t follow your own argument.

    I said that it would be pointless define “available” as used in my source, as simply being available under some plan offered by a cable company, whether or not a household subscribed.

    You say that “available” simply means they offer it.

    So, by your definition, there must be more cable companies that choose not to offer CNN than FNC, since the “available” number was 94 for CNN to 102 for FNC.

    Ergo, there MUST be at least one, but in all likelihood, MANY cable providers that do not offer CNN in any way shape or form.

    Find me one. Please. Rely your “personal knowledge.” Goodness knows your reliance on logic has failed thus far.

    Or shoot me one of those googles about such a dispute.

    All I am asking for is one.

25. #822887
    On October 13th, 2009 at 4:06 pm, Hannibal said:

    On October 13th, 2009 at 2:44 pm, chapoutier said:

    Maybe your personal knowledge can extend to showing me a single cable provider that does not offer CNN at some level. Please. Just one.

    Anyone? Please help the man out. .

    Israeli Cable Provider Dropping CNN, Picking Up al-Jazeera
    Tuesday October 23, 2007
    This just in: The Jerusalem Post reports that HOT Television, Israel’s biggest cable and satellite provider, is about to get rid of CNN and carry al-Jazeera’s English edition instead. “The announcement,” the Post reports, “marks the latest programming shake-up by the cable provider, whose subscribers make up nearly two-thirds of Israel’s cable and satellite audience.”

26. #822894
    On October 13th, 2009 at 4:10 pm, chapoutier said:

    Israeli Cable Provider Dropping CNN, Picking Up al-Jazeera

    Except that we are talking about US households. I thought that was obvious, but apparently not.

27. #822899
    On October 13th, 2009 at 4:13 pm, John Deaux said:

    On October 13th, 2009 at 4:06 pm, Hannibal said:

    Israeli Cable Provider Dropping CNN, Picking Up al-Jazeera

    Would that be considered a lateral transfer?

28. #822912
    On October 13th, 2009 at 4:24 pm, Hannibal said:

    On October 13th, 2009 at 4:10 pm, chapoutier said:

    Except that we are talking about US households. I thought that was obvious, but apparently not.

    Well, it is just the way us tools are, we read what you write and then blindly stumble on.

29. #822918
    On October 13th, 2009 at 4:30 pm, chapoutier said:

    Well, it is just the way us tools are, we read what you write and then blindly stumble on.

    Apparently not everything I write, seeing as this is the post that started the whole debate:

    Fox News is actually MORE available than CNN in the US, according to wiki (102 vs 93 million).

30. #822929
    On October 13th, 2009 at 4:53 pm, AlohaGuy said:

    Where were we when I was last here?

    DirectTV’s most basic plan the Family Package has neither Fox, nor CNN, nor CNN Headline news. It has DIY since you’ll have plenty of time on your hands.

31. #822934
    On October 13th, 2009 at 4:56 pm, chapoutier said:

    DirectTV’s most basic plan the Family Package has neither Fox, nor CNN, nor CNN Headline news. It has DIY since you’ll have plenty of time on your hands.

    But since their choice plan does, according to John424’s definition, it is irrelevant.

32. #822965
    On October 13th, 2009 at 5:31 pm, CO2 Producer said:

    Perhaps if FNC started fact-checking SNL skits critical of Obama,

    Or featured kids who sing and dance for health care…

33. #822971
    On October 13th, 2009 at 5:35 pm, CO2 Producer said:

    …reform. Obamacare reform…

34. #823153
    On October 13th, 2009 at 11:39 pm, WarTip said:

    Man, see all the fun I miss not owning a television or dealing with the cable companies.

35. #823596
    On October 14th, 2009 at 12:39 pm, prendad said:

    The very idea of a president of the United States paying so much attention to a particular news media is testimony to his ignorance and vanity. Mr. Obama, you need to get on with the rest of your life and forget about Fox News. But, you can’t, can you?. That is what I love about you liberal dimwits. Party on Barack Hussein.

36. #824382
    On October 15th, 2009 at 2:16 pm, rightwingrocker said:

    “What I think is fair to say about Fox — and certainly it’s the way we view it — is that it really is more a wing of the Republican Party,” said Anita Dunn, White House communications director, on CNN.

    CNN is more a wing of the Democrat Party than Fox will ever be of the Republican Party.

    If Fox News were a wing of the Republican Party, there wouldn’t be a Democrat living in the White House.

    RWR
    http://www.rightwingrocker.com

37. #824386
    On October 15th, 2009 at 2:19 pm, rightwingrocker said:

    Fox News is actually MORE available than CNN in the US, according to wiki (102 vs 93 million).

    Not only that, but it’s also the MOST WATCHED, and the second most watched cable channel overall (behind only USA Network), and that gap is closing fast.

    RWR
    http://www.rightwingrocker.com